Adoptionism

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Not to be confused with Adoption (theology).
Francesco Albani's The Baptism of Christ, when Jesus became one with God according to adoptionism

Adoptionism, also called dynamic monarchianism,

epistles of Paul and other early literature. However, adoptionist views sharply declined in prominence in the fourth and fifth centuries, as Church leaders condemned it as a heresy
.

Definition

Adoptionism is one of two main forms of

modalism, which considers God to be one while working through the different "modes" or "manifestations" of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, without limiting his modes or manifestations). Adoptionism denies the eternal pre-existence of Christ, and although it explicitly affirms his deity subsequent to events in his life, many classical trinitarians claim that the doctrine implicitly denies it by denying the constant hypostatic union of the eternal Logos to the human nature of Jesus.[2] Under adoptionism, Jesus is divine and has been since his adoption, although he is not equal to the Father, per "my Father is greater than I"[3][4] and as such is a kind of subordinationism. Adoptionism is sometimes, but not always, related to a denial of the virgin birth of Jesus
.

History

Part of a series on the
History of
Christian theology
Malmesbury Abbey's 1407 Bible from Belgium
Background
Ecumenical Creeds
Patristics and Councils
Post-Nicene development
Reformation
From the Reformation to the World Wars
Since the World Wars
Contextualisation and Inculturation
icon Christianity portal

Early Christianity

Adoptionism and high Christology

Part of a series on
Christology
Christ Pantocrator
Concepts
  • Threefold office
  • Redeemer
    		•
    Doctrines
    Christological doctrines
    By denomination
    See also: Christology § Development of "low Christology" and "high Christology"

    Bart Ehrman claims that the New Testament writings contain two different Christologies, namely a "low" or adoptionist Christology, and a "high" or "incarnation Christology".[5] The "low Christology" or "adoptionist Christology" is the belief "that God exalted Jesus to be his Son by raising him from the dead",[6] thereby raising him to "divine status".[web 1] The other early Christology is "high Christology," which is "the view that Jesus was a pre-existent divine being who became a human, did the Father's will on earth, and then was taken back up into heaven whence he had originally come,"[web 1][7] and from where he appeared on earth. The chronology of the development of these early Christologies is a matter of debate within contemporary scholarship.[8][9][10][web 2]

    According to the "evolutionary model"

    Kingdom of God, when all dead would be resurrected and the righteous exalted.[20] Adoptionist concepts can be found in the Gospel of Mark.[21][22][note 1] As Daniel Johansson notes, the majority of scholars hold Mark's Jesus as "an exalted, but merely human figure", especially when read in the apparent context of Jewish beliefs.[23] Later beliefs shifted the exaltation to his baptism, birth, and subsequently to the idea of his eternal existence, as witnessed in the Gospel of John.[15] Mark shifted the moment of when Jesus became the son to the baptism of Jesus, and later still Matthew and Luke shifted it to the moment of the divine conception, and finally John declared that Jesus had been with God from the beginning: "In the beginning was the Word".[18][24]

    One notable passage that may have been cited by early adoptionists was what exactly God said at Jesus's baptism; three different versions are recorded. One of them, found in the Codex Bezae version of Luke 3:22, is "You are my son; today I have begotten you."[25] This seems to be quoted in Acts 13:32–33 as well (in all manuscripts, not just Bezae) and in Hebrews 5:5.[26][27] Quotes from second and third century Christian writers almost always use this variant as well, with many fourth and fifth century writers continuing to use it, if occasionally with embarrassment; Augustine cites the line, for example, but clarifies God meant an eternal "today". Ehrman speculates that Orthodox scribes of the fourth and fifth century changed the passage in Luke to align with the version in Mark as a defense against adoptionists citing the passage in their favor.[25]

    Since the 1970s, these late datings for the development of a "high Christology" have been contested,[28] and a majority of scholars argue that this "high Christology" existed already before the writings of Paul.[5][note 2] According to the "New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule",[28][web 3] or the Early High Christology Club,[web 4] which includes Martin Hengel, Larry Hurtado, N. T. Wright, and Richard Bauckham,[28][web 4] this "incarnation Christology" or "high Christology" did not evolve over a longer time, but was a "big bang" of ideas which were already present at the start of Christianity, and took further shape in the first few decades of the church, as witnessed in the writings of Paul.[28][web 4][web 1][note 3] Some 'Early High Christology' proponents scholars argue that this "high Christology" may go back to Jesus himself.[33][web 2]

    According to Ehrman, these two Christologies existed alongside each other, calling the "low Christology" an "adoptionist Christology, and "the "high Christology" an "incarnation Christology".[5] Conversely, Michael Bird has argued that adoptionism did not first emerge until the 2nd century as a result of later theological debates and other socio-religious influences on the reading of certain biblical texts.[34]

    New Testamental epistles

    Adoptionist theology may also be reflected in canonical

    virgin birth of Christ. Paul describes Jesus as "born of a woman, born under the law" and "as to his human nature was a descendant of David" in the Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans. Christian interpreters, however, take his statements in Philippians 2 to imply that Paul believed Jesus to have existed as equal to God before his incarnation.[35]

    Shepherd of Hermas

    The 2nd-century work

    Shepherd of Hermas may also have taught that Jesus was a virtuous man filled with the Holy Spirit and adopted as the Son.[note 4][37][38]
    While the Shepherd of Hermas was popular and sometimes bound with the canonical scriptures, it did not retain canonical status, if it ever had it.

    Theodotus of Byzantium

    Philosophumena, VII, xxiii), but Jesus was not himself God until after his resurrection.[39][41]

    Adoptionism was declared heresy at the end of the 3rd century and was rejected by the Synods of Antioch and the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and identified the man Jesus with the eternally begotten Son or Word of God in the Nicene Creed.[42][43] The belief was also declared heretical by Pope Victor I.

    Ebionites

    Main article: Ebionites

    Adoptionism was also adhered to by the

    sinless devotion to the will of God.[44]

    The Ebionites were a

    voluntary poverty
    .

    Distinctive features of the Gospel of the Ebionites include the absence of the

    Adoptionist Christology,[note 5] in which Jesus is chosen to be God's Son at the time of his Baptism; the abolition of the Jewish sacrifices by Jesus; and an advocacy of vegetarianism.[note 6]

    Spanish Adoptionism

    Main article: Spanish Adoptionism

    Iberian Adoptionism was a theological position which was articulated in

    Alcuin of York, Agobard
    , and officially in Carolingian territory by the Council of Frankfurt (794).

    Despite the shared name of "adoptionism" the Spanish Adoptionist Christology appears to have differed sharply from the adoptionism of early Christianity. Spanish advocates predicated the term adoptivus of Christ only in respect to his humanity; once the divine Son "emptied himself" of divinity and "took the form of a servant" (Philippians 2:7),[50] Christ's human nature was "adopted" as divine.[51]

    Historically, many scholars have followed the Adoptionists' Carolingian opponents in labeling Spanish Adoptionism as a minor revival of "Nestorian" Christology.[52] John C. Cavadini has challenged this notion by attempting to take the Spanish Christology in its own Spanish/North African context in his study, The Last Christology of the West: Adoptionism in Spain and Gaul, 785–820.[53]

    Scholastic Neo-adoptionism

    A third wave was the revived form ("Neo-adoptionism") of

    Georgius Calixtus and Johann Ernst Immanuel Walch
    , have defended adoptionism as essentially orthodox.

    Modern adoptionist groups

    A form of adoptionism surfaced in Unitarianism during the 18th century as denial of the virgin birth became increasingly common, led by the views of Joseph Priestley and others.

    A similar form of adoptionism was expressed in the writings of

    ascension.[56]

    Christ as separate beings until they are joined at baptism.[57]

    See also

    Notes

    1. ^ Boyarin: "[W]e can still observe within the Gospel (especially in Mark, which has no miraculous birth story, and also even in Paul) the remnants of a version of Christology in which Jesus was born a man but became God at his baptism. This idea, later named the heresy of adoptionism (God adopting Jesus as his Son), was not quite stamped out until the Middle Ages.[22]
    2. ^ Richard Bauckham argues that Paul was not so influential that he could have invented the central doctrine of Christianity. Before his active missionary work, there were already groups of Christians across the region. For example, a large group already existed in Rome even before Paul visited the place. The earliest centre of Christianity was the twelve apostles in Jerusalem. Paul himself consulted and sought guidance from the Christian leaders in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1–2;[29] Acts 9:26–28,[30] 15:2).[31] "What was common to the whole Christian movement derived from Jerusalem, not from Paul, and Paul himself derived the central message he preached from the Jerusalem apostles."[32]
    3. ^ Loke (2017): "The last group of theories can be called 'Explosion Theories' (one might also call this 'the Big-Bang theory of Christology'!). This proposes that highest Christology was the view of the primitive Palestinian Christian community. The recognition of Jesus as truly divine was not a significant development from the views of the primitive Palestine community; rather, it 'exploded' right at the beginning of Christianity. The proponents of the Explosion view would say that the highest Christology of the later New Testament writings (e.g. Gospel of John) and the creedal formulations of the early church fathers, with their explicit affirmations of the pre-existence and ontological divinity of Christ, are not so much a development in essence but a development in understanding and explication of what was already there at the beginning of the Christian movement. As Bauckham (2008a, x) memorably puts it, 'The earliest Christology was already the highest Christology.' Many proponents of this group of theories have been labelled together as 'the New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule' (Hurtado 2003, 11), and they include such eminent scholars as Richard Bauckham, Larry Hurtado, N. T. Wright and the late Martin Hengel."[28]
    4. ^ "The Holy Pre-existent Spirit. Which created the whole creation, God made to dwell in flesh that he desired. This flesh, therefore, in which the Holy Spirit dwelt, was subject unto the Spirit, walking honorably in holiness and purity, without in any way defiling the Spirit. When then it had lived honorably in chastity, and had labored with the Spirit, and had cooperated with it in everything, behaving itself boldly and bravely, he chose it as a partner with the Holy Spirit; for the career of this flesh pleased [the Lord], seeing that, as possessing the Holy Spirit, it was not defiled upon the earth. He therefore took the son as adviser and the glorious angels also, that this flesh too, having served the Spirit unblamably, might have some place of sojourn, and might not seem to have lost the reward for its service; for all flesh, which is found undefiled and unspotted, wherein the Holy Spirit dwelt, shall receive a reward."[36]
    5. ^ Kloppenborg 1994, pp. 435–9; p. 435 – "This belief, known as "adoptionism", held that Jesus was not divine by nature or by birth, but that God chose him to become his son, i.e., adopted him."
    6. ^ Vielhauer & Strecker 1991, pp. 166–71; p. 168 – "Jesus' task is to do away with the 'sacrifices'. In this saying (16.4–5), the hostility of the Ebionites against the Temple cult is documented."

    References

    1. ^
      ISBN 9781405157629
      . The paucity of extant evidence makes an exact knowledge about the views of what modern scholars have dubbed "adoptionist" or 'dynamic' monarchianism uncertain. No documents written by adherents to this strain of Christian theology have survived. As a result, we cannot say what constituted a purely adoptionist viewpoint or how closely associated it was with what is typically called 'modalism'. True to its emphasis on divine monotheism, 'adoptionism' opposed any substantial division within God when it came to the incarnation of Christ as the Logos of God. As a result, the Jesus of the Gospels was a man empowered by the one God.
    2. ISBN 978-0-664-22810-1
    3. ^ John 14:28
    4. ISBN 978-0-7369-2084-1
    5. ^ a b c Ehrman 2014, p. 125.
    6. ^ Ehrman 2014, p. 120; 122.
    7. ^ Ehrman 2014, p. 122.
    8. ^ Loke 2017.
    9. ^ a b Ehrman 2014.
    10. ^ Talbert 2011, p. 3-6.
    11. ^ Netland 2001, p. 175.
    12. ^ Loke 2017, p. 3.
    13. ^ Mack 1995.
    14. ^ Ehrman 2003.
    15. ^ a b c Bart Ehrman, How Jesus became God, Course Guide
    16. ^ Loke 2017, p. 3-4.
    17. ^ Talbert 2011, p. 3.
    18. ^ a b Brown 2008, p. unpaginated.
    19. ^ Geza Vermez (2008), The Resurrection, p.138-139
    20. ^ Fredriksen 2008, p. unpaginated.
    21. ^ Ehrman 1996, p. 48–49.
    22. ^ a b Boyarin 2012, p. 56.
    23. S2CID 162387829
      .
    24. ^ Ehrman 1996, p. 74–75.
    25. ^ a b Ehrman 1996, p. 49; 62–67; 107.
    26. ^ Acts 13:32–33
    27. ^ Hebrews 5:5
    28. ^ a b c d e Loke 2017, p. 5.
    29. ^ Galatians 2:1–2
    30. ^ Acts 9:26–28
    31. ^ Acts 15:2
    32. ^ Bauckham 2011, p. 110–111.
    33. ^ Loke 2017, p. 6.
    34. ^ Bird 2017, p. 9.
    35. ^ Hurtado, L. W. (1993). "Pre-existence". In Hawthorne, Gerald F. (ed.). Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. pp. 743–746.
    36. ^ "The Shepherd of Hermas (Lightfoot translation)". www.earlychristianwritings.com.
    37. ISBN 0-313-29649-9
    38. ISBN 978-0-8308-5127-0
      . The most prominent example of Angel Adoptionism from the early Church would have to be the document known as The Shepherd of Hermass. In The Shepherd, the savior is an angel called the "angel of justification," who seems to be identified with the archangel Michael. Although the angel is often understood to be Jesus, he is never named as Jesus.
    39. ^
      ISBN 978-0-567-61585-5
      . The Saviour, jesus Christ, who from the fullness (the pleroma) of the Father descended on earth, is identified with the Logos, but initially not entirely with the Only Begotten Son. In john 1:14 is written, after all, that his glory was as of the Only Begotten, from which is concluded that his glory must be distinguished from this (7, 3b). When the Logos or Saviour descended, Sophia, according to Theodotus, provided a piece of flesh (sarkion), namely a carnal body, also called 'spiritual seed' (1, 1).
    40. ^ CARM, Adoptionism
    41. ISBN 978-3-525-53099-3
      . Ps 2:7-8 is also quoted in 1 Clem 36:4 and in Just. Dial. 122:6, whilst only verse seven of Ps 2 is found in the Ebionite Gospel (fr. 4) and in Just. Dial. 88:8, 103:6. The quotation from Ps 2:7 that occurs in Heb 1:5 and 5:5 found its way into Hebrews via the early Jewish and early Christian traditions.
  • ^ Harnack, Adolf Von (1889). History of Dogma.
  • ISBN 9780736948074
    . Retrieved 29 April 2014.
  • ^ Epiphanius of Salamis (403 CE). pp. 30:3 & 30:13.
  • ^ Cross, EA; Livingston, FL, eds. (1989). "Ebionites". The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford University Press.
  • ^ Dunn 2006, p. 282.
  • ^ "Ebionites". Encyclopædia Britannica.
  • ^ Kohler, Kaufmann (1901–1906). "Ebionites". In Singer, Isidore; Alder, Cyrus (eds.). Jewish Encyclopedia.
  • ISBN 0-06-250585-8., an abridgement
  • ^ Philippians 2:7
  • ^ James Ginther, Westminster Handbook to Medieval Theology, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009), 3.
  • ^ For an example of this characterization, see Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma, vol. 5, trans. Neil Buchanan, (New York: Dover, 1961), 280.
  • ^ John C. Cavadini, The Last Christology of the West: Adoptionism in Spain and Gaul, 785–820, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993), 4–5.
  • ^ Book of the Law, pp. 157-58, note 9.
  • ^ Book of the Law, pp. 165-66.
  • ^ Book of the law, pp. 155-58.
  • ^ "The Christian Community Movement for Religious Renewal: Our Creed". April 2, 2023. Retrieved April 2, 2023.

    • Sources

    Printed sources
    Web sources
    1. ^ a b c Ehrman, Bart D. (February 14, 2013). "Incarnation Christology, Angels, and Paul". The Bart Ehrman Blog. Retrieved May 2, 2018.
    2. ^ a b Larry Hurtado, "The Origin of 'Divine Christology'?"
    3. ^ Larry Hurtado (10 July 2015), "Early High Christology": A "Paradigm Shift"? "New Perspective"?
    4. ^ a b c Bouma, Jeremy (27 March 2014). "The Early High Christology Club and Bart Ehrman – An Excerpt from 'How God Became Jesus'". Zondervan Academic Blog. HarperCollins Christian Publishing. Retrieved 2 May 2018.

    External links

    Wikisource has the text of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article "Adoptianism".
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adoptionism&oldid=1220227481"